Solid reasoning Nekomata! Sucks to see some of the name calling and quick accusations in the other forum. Not at all helpful to end users who could see benifit from the ubnt platform. Not to mention the cambium test did show sistuations when the ubnt gear did better. I’ll never understand the attacks when it comes to helping other operators pick whats best for them. One of the minor reasons we turned away from ubnt, its difficult to find clear useful information to questions like this. Each vendor has its nitch, and it would be so much more helpfully to see those adantages expressed by those forum members marked as top contributors rather than insults and accusations of rigged results. Show off what each vendor does best instead!
5 Likes
Hi all,
Thanks for the discussion and input. I've had some time over the holidays to think this through and focus on our business drivers rather than which technology is the latest. I've realised that picking a vendor with the latest whiz-bang gadget and fastest speed is wrong and I should focus on what enables us to transform our business to accomodate the growth in bandwidth in the future.
Here's what I came up with...
Business requirements
- Provide 100M service now
- Provide 200M (or higher) in future
- Compete with cable operators
Remember, that I'm looking at an urban micropop setup, so short distances, high speed packages to compete with wireline services.
Based on this it was obvious I need a solution that handles 80mhz, or has a path to such a solution. Despite being urban, we have very little noise so 80mhz is feasible. We're unlikely to use beamstearing antennas due to the antenna size and where we are hosting our AP's.
This gave us the following selection criteria:
- Has 80mhz or roadmap to it
- GPS
- Low CPE cost
- If 80mhz is in the future, must have migration path
Now that last point is golden for our business. If we deploy a non 80mhz product now and have to upgrade in the future, they must both co-exist using the same AP. We CANNOT run two networks side by side as this will consume twice the spectrum, and we would unlikely be able to negotiate mounting space for twice the AP's. So considering the 4 vendors that are in my target CPE price range (Cambium, Mikrotik, Mimosa, Ubiquiti) I concluded that...
- Ubiquiti: Doesn't have 80mhz now in AC product line (although some discussion that it can be enabled by hacking the config via shell). No roadmap that I've seen for wave2, only LTU. Therefore if we deploy AC now, to upgrade to a faster platform we would need to run AC and LTU as two seprate networks. Also, LTU is a new platform, and I suspect it may be another year after released before it becomes stable for prime time. This is a bust.
- Mimosa: Has 80mhz but the solution is quite expensive and our financial models require a much bigger capex investment to get this off the ground. I've also not seen anything from Mimosa that shows a roadmap, so it's unclear that there is anything beyond their first generation of kit (A5's, B series, and C5's). This is a bust.
- Mikrotik: They've had 80mhz for a long while, and wave 2 is just being released now. Although they don't have GPS and their wireless tech is somewhat behind the curve, it can work with some compromises such as horns, short distances, and keeping the users per AP low. Given that their very low cost gives me more than 4 x the profit than other vendors with around half the capex, it may be worth the compromises. This is a maybe, but needs some experimentation.
- Cambium: Only 40mhz available now, but this will deliver our 100M package. Has an upgrade path to 80mhz by swapping the AP and keeping old and new CPE's on one network. Has mature GPS. The wave2 stuff is also new, and you could argue the same point that I did for LTU above, but I have more confidence that Cambium will deliver a good product out the gate and any bugs will stabalise much quicker. 4x4 is also interesting, but unsure how I will yet implement this.
So in conclusion, it seems Cambium is the only one that ticks all boxes, even though it's 11n technology today. In our tests we get ~200M downlink in flexible mode, which isn't as good as ~260M from UBNT & MT, but it's enough for now and that extra 20-30% speed isn't as important as having an upgrade path.
Hope my reasoning makes sense, and I believe it echoes what a few of you have been saying above and on other similar threads.
Rich
6 Likes
...even though it's 11n technology today. In our tests we get ~200M downlink in flexible mode...Rich
Hi Rich. Yes, the ePMP1000 & 2000 are 11n technology, but I've been testing the new Cambium AC gear. The Force300 is the only member yet, and the firmware is still Beta - BUT in a 20 Mhz wide channel, with fixed ratio of 75%/25% set, I get about 160 Mbit aggregate throughput. 125+ Mbit down and 35+ Mbit up... in a 20 Mhz wide channel. We haven't really tested 40 Mhz or 80 Mhz widths yet, but I'm expecting no less than spectactular.
http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-2000-and-1000/Force-300-25-first-impression/td-p/86606/page/2
Again, this is still Beta firmware and there are still features missing. Currently, these are made for PTP backhauls only, and there is no '3000 Access Point' ready currently, but I post this just to show you the boost from Cambium's N gear to their AC gear. The Force 300's are really impressing me. And, unlike other brands we've experienced, where 'beta period' seems to last for years, Cambium is on Release Candidate 52 already. I now have them carrying live traffic on our network, and they are performing wonderfully. :D
1 Like
Hi Ninedd;
Great to hear and writeup on the switched to ePMP 2.4GHz portfolio from the PMP100 900MHz. Would mind sharing which sector antenna you used for this migration? Cambium's solution or the vendor/model?
Regards.
We have two links with epmp force 300 and not impressed at all. Epmp 1000 and 2000 work great but ubiquiti is far ahead in the ac race. Especially with them coming out with the ac equipment a year earlier and how well it works. So far with the force 300 the signal is a lot higher then what it should be with a line of site at this length and wont even stay registered at a 72 to eAlign. Honestly a low end powerbeam ac works better than the force 300 more speed a stability. Also with the 4.1.1 update we lost the gui and had to reset the dish in ssh to get it back. I hope that 3 or 4 firmwares down the road epmp will catch up.
That hasn’t been our Force300 experience. For us, they have been very solid and very spectrum efficient since the last FW update. We only have them running in 20 or 40mhz widths currently, but they link with zero downtime for us.
1 Like
@jlkz wrote:We have two links with epmp force 300 and not impressed at all. Epmp 1000 and 2000 work great but ubiquiti is far ahead in the ac race. Especially with them coming out with the ac equipment a year earlier and how well it works. So far with the force 300 the signal is a lot higher then what it should be with a line of site at this length and wont even stay registered at a 72 to eAlign. Honestly a low end powerbeam ac works better than the force 300 more speed a stability. Also with the 4.1.1 update we lost the gui and had to reset the dish in ssh to get it back. I hope that 3 or 4 firmwares down the road epmp will catch up.
signal strength isn't to blame on the radio, link budget is a link budget. like gain and conducted power on equipment will land in the same general RSSI regardless of brand, if you're seeing a major difference from these than a ubnt product with like gain and transmit power, something isn't right. possibly the alignment or tx power was never turned up. the f300 has a long way to go, but keep in mind its a gen 2 AC radio, UBNT is a gen 1. gen 1 chips have been around much longer so I'd expect them to be much more mature at this time. once the epmp3000 if released and made to run at its potential, won't be much of a comparison between ubnt and epmp in AC devices. with UBNTs focus on the LTU, that's where the battle for top dog is going to come into play. cambium went 4x4 on the AP and ubnt is trying to code to 4096. my experience with the AF5xHD is it needs as much development as the cambium products at this point. remember the f300 is meant to be a CPE and light PTP radio, its only half of the line in its early days. seems to be the trend with all of the vendors right now.
1 Like
Anyone tried the 60Ghz ignitenet stuff for Micropops ? 2.5Gb at the AP seems pretty sweet if you can feed your PoPs with fiber. And they have 5Ghz built in (and 2.4Ghz I think) that you can use as fallover or for customers that the 60Ghz can't reach correct ? 60Ghz is really short range but that's the whole point of micropops.
I think we are going to set on of these up and see what it can do. Running fiber to the neighborhood and then 60Ghz to the home is insainly cheaper than taking the fiber all the way to the home.
Wonder if there is any chance we will see a 60Ghz cabmium / ePMP solution any time soon or if they are going to continue to be a generation behind everyone else.
ubiquiti has canceled the LTU proyect?
@jldiaz wrote:ubiquiti has canceled the LTU proyect?
Supposedly the news of canecllation was an accidental/confused email sent to a European distributor. Multiple UBNT staff working on the LTU project have stated that this is not accurate and that the product is still very much alive and progressing. You can find the thread in the UBNT forums discussing it HERE.
@brubble1 wrote:Anyone tried the 60Ghz ignitenet stuff for Micropops ? 2.5Gb at the AP seems pretty sweet if you can feed your PoPs with fiber. And they have 5Ghz built in (and 2.4Ghz I think) that you can use as fallover or for customers that the 60Ghz can't reach correct ? 60Ghz is really short range but that's the whole point of micropops.
I think we are going to set on of these up and see what it can do. Running fiber to the neighborhood and then 60Ghz to the home is insainly cheaper than taking the fiber all the way to the home.
Wonder if there is any chance we will see a 60Ghz cabmium / ePMP solution any time soon or if they are going to continue to be a generation behind everyone else.
We are looking to do some of this. Our local city has a fiber ring. They are currently running fiber to their water towers for us install wireless gear. The downtown area runs parallel to one of the tanks 1500-2500' away from the tank. We plan to use Ignitenet 60Ghz for internet and phone service to the businesses on main street.
I do a lot of Motorola contract work, and my sources with Nokia tell me Cambium is working with Siklu on a 60Ghz product line.
@Eric Ozrelic wrote:
@jldiaz wrote:ubiquiti has canceled the LTU proyect?
Supposedly the news of canecllation was an accidental/confused email sent to a European distributor. Multiple UBNT staff working on the LTU project have stated that this is not accurate and that the product is still very much alive and progressing. You can find the thread in the UBNT forums discussing it HERE.
They say that there is a small change of hardware in the Base Station, but that the product is very advanced. almost two years since its presentation
Hello richinuk
we work 90% of our network with cambium, although the epmp 1000 and 2000 series can work with the epmp3000, the SM the maximum modulation will be 64QAM, the only antennas that support 256QAM are the Force300 and I don't remember the another model (the latter can work in 80 mhz, but if you use a mixed solution, the maximum channel width that you will be able to use is 40 mhz). If your customers connect with antennas, I think it was the best option for price quality. but if they are mobile devices I think ubiquiti has AP with better costs and very good capacity and stability. as the unifi HD. Depending on what you have in mind. I hope this helps you!
Regards!
I would now choose UBNT.
It is a half a year now we ask devs to implement at least seamless channel switch and so on like site survey instead of eDetect (Who ever developed this one I bet never used it in real life. It is useless).
I don't know about 3k now but ubnt has option to switch frequency seamlessly. Without phone calls without 10mins reconnections and so on. Once I ve tried it on AC I want it, I need it!
But even if it has this option I will have to abandon you guys because for the price of just set 3k I can replace my 5 2k sectors and even add some more. In this case lack of frequency reuse is not a disadvantage because at one sector for a particular client you get free spectrum but for other on the same channel you get nothing..
The performance. I could not get it higher than 50mbps in 20mhz per sector with 36 stations. What for is the number of 60 (120)? Are there still 0.5 mbps tariffs in the world??.
Some of the customers are still getting less than 3mbps free of charge because we do not comply to the agreement. And many of them are on 14MCS, fine adjusted. And by the way: on force 190 mounting is awful. This is what happens when a designer does the job not a technician. Same was on 180. You need carry a pair of pliers and some sort of special tool and a screw driver and when you tighten 190 it moves out of adjustment Instead of just having a single 13 or 10mm key. This is a big fail , guys! All together this is completely not what I have expected from an "advanced" make.
1 Like
Hi there,
I agree with you. If I would start a new wisp right now, I would choose UBNT platform, even just AC, or maybe try LTU new devices! I'm always been a big Cambium fan, but starting from F300 and then epmp3k it's really a pain using them... full of bugs, every new firmware is a nightmare and you can't use it in production....
epmp1k/2k were great products but they're now a bit outdated since they're still based on old 802.11n devices and their performance now are slow for the market requests.
I've already talked with Cambium people some months ago about this.... their devices were best 3 or 4 years ago.... then ubnt started developing very well on new firmwares and now AC platform is really great....
As you said beeonline last but not least, changing AP freq live, without losing connection to the SM is really wonderful!
2 Likes
So we use both Cambium and Ubiquiti... and for comparison... it's taken Ubiquiti YEARS to get their AC platform to the point it is now. LTU's software is in its infancy as well... they just came out of beta like a few months ago and there's still a lot of features missing that are now standard on their AC platform.
I also think you need to remember that when UBNT AC came out it was NOT backwards or forwards compatible with their N series... it took them YEARS to finally add backwards compatibility support, and that was around the time Cambium released elevate (what a coincidence!).
It's only been a couple years now and I've participated in helping the ePMP team test and debug pretty much every version that's come out. I can say that they've made huge strides in terms of adding features, fixing bugs, and increasing performance. I'm very satisfied with the rate of development and how proactive they've been with connecting with the community to resolve issues. The best thing that you can do to help keep things moving forward is to bring up issues in the forum or create support tickets and help them gather data.
3 Likes
Well Eric, I agree with you about how long ubnt took for developing AC firmware stable like it is now.
But I must say that Cambium made a lot of mistakes in the past maybe coming out with products too unstable like Force300 was (a nightmare for us 18 months ago!) or waiting too long for introducing new features, maybe very simple, like watchdog! We've been asked for... I can't remember.... maybe 3-4 years? They introduced finally with Force300 (just because was terrible unstable!) and then they finally setup all over epmp family devices.
That's the same for Test button for saving changes for just a couple of minutes.... how long they did to introduce it?
I'm still a big fan of Cambium products but I think they are really slow in developing new stable firmwares lately...
2 Likes
+1 for fast implementation Seamless Frequency change LIKE UBNT
4 Likes
Seamless Frequency change is definitely nice feature to have.
Dmitry
6 Likes
I've stayed away from the 3000 line -- to use the -ac speeds, signals need to be better than I am used to seeing (tough woody neighborhood). So I'd like to see some more love for the 2000s. eDetect is pretty lame -- I'd like to see a full scan, which Ubiquiti has had all along. Yes it interrupts service, but it's done at installation and in a pinch, not often. Scanning the client returns the result when it reconnects.
Also, when it goes to the wrong choice in the AP list, there should be a way to tell it to go to the one you want, right away, without removing the one it's on from the list That just seems so easy! (UBNT doens't allow a list, so it doesn't have the advantage.)
3 Likes